Advertisement

Letters | How new accountability system for Hong Kong civil servants can be impactful

Readers discuss the accountability system proposed in the chief executive’s policy address, and funding for foreign language learning in schools

Reading Time:3 minutes
Why you can trust SCMP
People on an escalator look up at the government headquarters in Tamar, Admiralty, on February 22. Photo: Edmond So
Feel strongly about these letters, or any other aspects of the news? Share your views by emailing us your Letter to the Editor at [email protected] or filling in this Google form. Submissions should not exceed 400 words
Third Side has long pushed for civil service accountability reform, focusing not on punishment, but on transparency and real accountability. We welcome the latest policy address putting the “Heads of Department Accountability System” front and centre, with the Public Service Commission handling independent investigations. The direction is spot on. The real test now is delivery. Three principles will make or break this reform: responsibility must be clear, information must be transparent, improvements must stick.

For years, government departments lived by one rule: do not aim for success, just avoid failure. Endless red tape kills initiatives before they start. For accountability to work, we need measurable targets that show results. Each department should focus on three to five key outcomes with clear deadlines.

Advertisement

But punishment alone will not change how people work. We need to reward innovation. Reward results. Reward public servants who step up and get things done.

Currently, Hong Kong has two separate accountability systems. The new heads of department system covers civil servants, while the existing principal officials system covers political appointees. These need to connect into one unbroken responsibility chain from bureau secretaries down to frontline civil servants, with everyone subject to performance evaluation and consequences tied to results.

Advertisement

The Hong Kong government has a chronic problem: authority and responsibility do not match, and different levels have different goals. Senior officials handle external commitments, middle management controls resources, frontline staff focus on implementation. Too often everyone works separately, and the final results do not match expectations.

Advertisement
Select Voice
Choose your listening speed
Get through articles 2x faster
1.25x
250 WPM
Slow
Average
Fast
1.25x